Friday, July 18, 2008

Paul Westerdawg over at GSB brings up the topic of what Sanford Stadium would look like if the bridge area was enclosed. I'm just completely against ever enclosing the stadium. A lot of people are on both sides of the fence with this topic. First off, I don't care about having 100k seats. I would rather have a beautiful stadium than 8-15k more fans inside during games. Hell, we are already the 5th largest on campus stadium. We don't need to sacrifice the aesthetic look of Sanford Stadium and that part of campus just for more fans. I love the view of the bridge from the inside of the stadium. Imagine how much better Neyland Stadium would be if they had 10k less seats and a view of the Tennessee River from inside that dump.

There is something to be said about tradition, and I believe that the bridge and the view looking into the stadium and looking out the stadium is all part of Georgia's football tradition. Enclosing the stadium is a bad idea.

8 comments:

I am not a fan of any expansion on Sanford. The placement of the scoreboard in that writer's rendition in absolutely terrible. I hate it. I hate the 600 level seats. In most games those seats currently go unused to one degree or another. I, for one, am not on the fence on this one.

This is going to raise a few eyebrows, but I for one have never thought of Sanford as one of the UGA football program's most redeeming attributes. So I don't see expansion has having a negative effect. Sometimes I think having more people might make the place louder and on par with other SEC stadiums when it comes to crowd noise. To be honest, right now we're probably in the lower half of the league when it comes to atmosphere. I know there are times when it gets pretty loud, but it isn't anywhere near the deafening ballpark of a Death Valley, Neyland, Swamp, or Jordan Hare. Its a great facility in a unique location (right in the middle of campus), but other than that there are few redeeming qualities. Maybe one day they will change the concessions and I'll have a better overall impression, but until that day comes I think a shake-up to the structure of the stadium wouldn't be all bad.

One thing I will agree on, closing in the bridge should not be an option. I would be all for extending the 600 level all the way around on the East and South sides. I think making East Campus Road a tunnel through the support piece of the stadium would be pretty neat.

Again, I'm neither here nor there when it comes to expansion....But I am extremely opposed to enclosing the stadium. That is my only point. And if we lost that view in and out of the stadium, I think you would realize what a redeeming quality the views and the bridge are.

Amid all the stadium expansion talk, no one mentions parking. Parking is a hugh problem now. Whatcha gonna do with all those thousands more vehicles? I agree, it's big enough. But don't forget the power of thealmighty $$$$$!

This season, prepare yourself to look out of the stadium, over the bridge, and at the massive steel girders of the new Tate center. Considering the height of the new building i would say that the view from inside the stadium is already kaput. But i like the idea of extending the 600 level over East Campus rd and all the way to the skyboxes. that's great. By the way, it's not like parking was ever cheap or even available in the first place...

What is most important, revenue, view, noise, or aesthetics? I vote to keep Sanford open. Raise the west end bridge 10-20 feet and build seats up to that level. Also, make the bridge wider and turn it into a plaza blending in with the new construction.